Why do some people seem more deserving of government assistance than others?

Social scientists have been exploring this question for decades. Much of the research has focused on the criteria people use to judge the “deservingness” of the vulnerable and poor. For example, van Oorschot (2000) proposed the influential CARIN model of deservingness, which consists of five criteria:

  1. Control: Is the situation of hardship caused by the person's own (in)action?

  2. Attitude: Does the person express gratitude for receiving assistance?

  3. Reciprocity: Has the person contributed to society in the past and present?

  4. Identity: Has the person embraced shared membership in the national group?

  5. Need: What degree of hardship has the person experienced?

More recently, Harell et al (2021) has proposed an alternative deservingness model, one that stresses shared group membership and obligations. This model was initially tested in Canada, where researchers fielded a questionnaire in both English and French, and included questions about “perceptions of the deservingness of four key groups in the Canadian population: English- speaking Canadians, French-speaking Quebeckers, immigrants and Aboriginal peoples”. Here are the deservingness criteria used in the questionnaire, with the country reference changed from Canada to the US and evaluated groups left unspecified:

  1. Better Place: Do demands made by each of the following groups make the U.S. a better place to live or a worse place to live?

  2. Patriotic: Where would you rate [group x] on the following dimensions: Unpatriotic-Patriotic

  3. Identity: How much do you think each of the following groups identifies with the U.S.?

  4. Cares: How much do you think each group cares about the concerns and needs of other Americans?

  5. Thankful: The government provides various programs and benefits that seek to help various communities in the U.S. How thankful do you think each group is to receive these benefits?

  6. Sacrifice: How willing do you think the following groups are to make sacrifices for other Americans?

  7. Fair Share: One way citizens contribute to society is by working and paying taxes. Given the resources available in each community, do you think the following groups are contributing their fair share, or more or less than their fair share?

  8. Fight If the U.S. was involved in a war, how willing do you think people from each of the following groups would be to volunteer to fight for the U.S.? 

In addition to the shared membership questionnaire, study participants completed measures on xenophobia, strength of national attachment, and the perceived need, control and deservingness of different groups. Based on their findings, the authors conclude:

“Perceptions of shared membership are central to judgements of the deservingness of minority groups in Canada. To be sure, beliefs about whether groups are in poverty and whether they themselves are responsible for their economic problems do find a place in our results. But perceived membership in the Canadian community appears to play a more consistent and critical role in shaping deservingness judgements. Moreover, there is a hierarchy in assessments of shared membership. Immigrants and Aboriginal peoples tend to be viewed as less a part of the Canadian community, with the French-speaking Quebeckers being closest to English-speaking Canadians. These minorities are seen as less part of ‘us’ – less committed to the Canadian community, less concerned about other Canadians, less willing to make sacrifices for them.

Such perceptions matter. Deservingness judgements rooted in perceptions of shared membership shape support for a redistributive state. In the case of all three minorities, there is a clear positive relationship between perceptions of shared membership and support for their inclusion in redistributive systems, as well as targeted spending on group-specific accommodations. Seeing minority groups as committed members of society increases willingness to support spending on programmes to address their unique needs.”

Critically, respondents’ level of prejudice, xenophobia, and support for redistributive policies did not predict, or only weakly predicted, their judgments on group shared membership and deservingness.

I would love to see this study done in the US. It might shed more light on why so many Americans are unsympathetic to calls for massive redistribution to correct the wrongs of history.

I suspect the results would be similar to the Canadian study.

—

References:

Harell, A., Banting, K., Kymlicka, W., & Wallace, R. (2021). Shared membership beyond national identity: Deservingness and solidarity in diverse societies. Political Studies, 003232172199693. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321721996939 

van Oorschot, W. (2000). Who should get what, and why? On deservingness criteria and the conditionality of solidarity among the public, Policy & Politics, 28(1), 33-48. Retrieved Mar 5, 2023, from https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/view/journals/pp/28/1/article-p33.xml